United Health Products Inc (UEEC)

[shoondale]

"But what is the most alarming to us in the 10/18/19 announcement is that the PR went silent on the very important product safety outcomes. From the UEEC clinical protocol, described on its clinicaltrials.gov page we learned about four secondary study outcomes:

Source: clinicaltrials.gov

While the Primary outcome and the Secondary outcome #1 in the UEEC study protocol are efficacy related, the Secondary #2, #3, and #4 outcomes are all safety outcomes and are of critical importance for FDA approval. The October 18th PR only addresses success of the Primary outcome and Secondary outcome #1. The PR didn't say if the study has shown a non-inferiority or superiority of HemoStyp vs Surgicel in the secondary outcomes #2-4. The history of UEEC only disclosing positive news makes us believe that the omission of results relevant to outcomes #2-4 could have been on purpose, because the clinical study likely showed the inferior performance of HemoStyp vs Surgicel in these outcome measures.

The statistician was very specific to claim non-inferiority and superiority of HemoStyp only in the initial hemostasis after application of HemoStyp to the wound. It is silent on what has happened after the initial hemostasis was achieved.

HemoStyp, according to UEEC, quickly dissolves in an aqueous environment due to its unique degradation properties. We can find this on the company’s website.

From UEEC’s product testing page:

The data obtained during analysis of sample UHP Box of 2” x 2” Pouches indicates the material begins to dissolve in water within one minute. The sample is completely dissolved within 24 hours. Not enough material remains for analysis at the 24 hour time point.

If HemoStyp dissolves too soon, the surgical wound would start bleeding again, and this would be a very serious safety issue.

Imagine a major disaster when bleeding re-occurs after the surgeon has already closed the outmost patient skin layer! The outcomes 2-4 directly address this key safety concern, describing in quantitative terms how well the initially achieved hemostasis is maintained during the surgery. Outcome 4 is about the failure of initial hemostasis, as measured in reoperations, during the one month after surgery. It seems to us that a hemostatic agent that is quick to achieve initial hemostasis, but rapidly dissolves and may frequently fail later resulting in recurrence of bleeding, is a major health hazard. Why would the FDA approve HemoStyp, if it indeed fails to maintain hemostasis, knowing that Surgicel is already a reasonably effective and safe FDA approved product?

From all these observations, we conclude that the clinical study of HemoStyp versus Surgicel was likely a failure. However, if and when its PMA application" gets rejected, we doubt that shareholders will hear about it. We expect it will be just like when UEEC applied for PMA approval for Class III in late 2017, there will just not be any updates, like it never happened.""

https://seekingalpha.com/article/4300303-united-health-products-press-releases-cannot-be-taken-face-valuee